Attention new SAT Gurus -- Complaint about reading question in new SAT Official Practice Test 3

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

I’m working through Practice Test 3 of the new Official SAT Study Guide, and I take issue with question 5 of the first section (reading test on the Lady Carlotta passage). Does anyone else agree that, at best, this question is very poorly drafted and, at worst, the supposed correct answer is actually wrong? Alternatively, can someone explain why my logic is flawed?

Q5 states: “The description of how Lady Carlotta ‘put the doctrine of non-interference into practice’ (lines 14-15) mainly serves to”

Answers A and D are clearly incorrect and can be easily eliminated. Choice B is “illustrate the subtle cruelty in her nature” and choice C is “provide a humorous insight into her character.” According to the College Board, the correct answer is C.

I agree that the anecdote provides an insight into her character, and perhaps it is a humorous insight, but the insight is that Lady Carlotta is capable of being cruel to a friend in order to make a point. She had a friend who “eloquently” tried to persuade Lady Carlotta not to interfere in other people’s business (on behalf of a “distressed animal”). Lady Carlotta taught her a lesson by refusing to help her when she was trapped by an angry boar. Lady Carlotta continued her painting on the other side of a fence while the friend was stuck for 3 hours in a “small and extremely uncomfortable” tree. The reading goes on to state that, “It is to be feared that she lost the friendship of the ultimately rescued lady.” It seems to me that this indicates that Lady Carlotta’s behavior was indeed cruel and perceived as cruel by the former friend.

My only real hesitation about choice B is that it uses the term “subtle” cruelty. It could be argued that there was nothing subtle about how cruel she was to the friend. But I could also argue that her use of situational irony made the use of the word “subtle” appropriate.

The CB certainly did not point to the use of the word “subtle” as being the reason for eliminating that answer choice. Indeed, the CB answer explanation simply states that “the description of how she ‘put the doctrine of non-interference into practice’ does not suggest that Lady Carlotta is … cruel.” BS. It absolutely does suggest that Lady Carlotta can be cruel, at least to humans (if not to animals).

In my opinion, B and C would both be acceptable answers, but for the existence of the other one. I’d argue that B is the better choice of the two, because it is more specific, but in truth it just seems to be a poorly drafted question with no clear correct answer. Am I wrong?

In theory, the correct answer to each reading question should be as clear and certain as the answer to a math problem. I don’t see it.

2

Being “extremely uncomfortable” for three hours is not tantamount to cruelty. Cruel is a strong word.

3

Thanks for responding, @marvin100. I suppose you’re right. It still seems awfully nuanced to me. I guess she was merely mean and insensitive and would only have been deemed cruel if the friend fell from the tree and was mauled or killed by the boar.

I’m probably overly quick to jump on the CB; I’m not pleased with how they’re handling the new SAT.

4

If it’s any consolation, I (college student who got 800 in CR both times I took the SAT) would agree with you, based on your summary here. Maybe it’s more “humorous” in context…

5

This is the type of question you would see on the standardized ELA testing for kids in grades 3-8. Basically, two answers can be easily eliminated and there are two correct answers. Your job is to choose the best of the two correct answers by figuring out what the test maker is looking for. It’s incredibly frustrating.

6

@SoccerMomGenie - when sanctimonious people “get their comeuppance,” others often find it humorous. The treed lady was giving moral advice, and when her friend took it, she suffered some (entertainingly embarrassing) consequences. I found it “funny-ish.”

7

@mom2twogirls Sadly, this is the case. The Collegeboard never had the intentions of making an achievement test its product; that was the job of state exams and others. The SAT was designed to measure college readiness, but the social nature of America has pressured the Collegeboard to run down the wrong path.

8

@GMKoon, I agree, but I don’t think it’s the “social nature of America” that pressured the CB to change; it was CB’s desire to compete with ACT. ACT started successfully marketing itself as both a college readiness measurement and a high school achievement test and began to overtake the SAT in the market. This is how the CB responded to that market pressure.

@marvin100, I somewhat agree, but the santimonious lady chided Lady Carlotta against intervening in other PEOPLES’ business on behalf of their distressed animals. Technically, Lady Carlotta was not heeding that advice when she ignored her distressed friend who was being attacked by an angry animal. To me, it showed me that Lady Carlotta was protective of animals, but insensitive to the distress of her human friends. I get the humor, but still think the answer wasn’t as clear as it should be for a standardized exam.

This was an interesting reading, and frankly I’m inclined to try to locate the whole text and read it. It was heading into an intriguing direction. Lady Carlotta missed her train (due to intervening on behalf of a horse) and went home with a stranger who mistook her for the new governess. Lady Carlotta did not correct the mistake, but played along. When reminded that she should speak French to the charges after supper, she told the mother that she would speak French 4 days a week and Russian 3 days a week. The mother was befuddled and responded that no one would be able to understand the Russian. I think Lady Carlotta just shrugged. Certainly, the tone of the whole piece was humorous. I’m curious to learn just how humorously misanthropic Lady Carlotta turns out to be.

9

I found the piece – “The Schartze-Metterklume Method,” by HH Munro (Saki)

It was only maybe double the length of the portion contained in the SAT. Lady Carlotta was indeed a mild sadist who found humor in turning peoples’ lives upside down. It’s not clear what lengths she would have gone to, if allowed. When the mother told the presumed governess that she would like the children to learn history by acting it out, Lady Carlotta (using physical threats) had the children abduct the servant’s young daughters in order to teach the Rape of the Sabine Women. When the lady of the house thwarted the scene, Lady Carlotta responded, “Of course, if, thanks to your interference, your boys go through life thinking that the Sabine women ultimately escaped, I really cannot be held responsible.” Apparently, Alfred Hitchcock produced the story as a short film in his “Alfred Hitchcock Presents” series in 1955.

My conclusion – the story was humorous in a somewhat disturbing sort of way. Lady Carlotta was cruel, but not in a way that caused any actual harm – but only because she was thwarted?

I continue to think the SAT question was poorly constructed.

10

The whole point of Critical Reading skills is to pick out the nuances and read between the lines.